Appellate judges say a suit they are overseeing that centers on a decades-old EPA and Army Corps of Engineers rule excluding some wetlands from the Clean Water Act (CWA) could - if ultimately appealed to the Supreme Court - be a vehicle for the justices to try limiting courts' deference to regulators' interpretations of the wetlands rale. During Aug. 16 oral argument in Universal Welding and Fabrication, Inc., v. Army Corps of Engineers, judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit questioned the Alaska metalworking company Universal Welding and Fabrication's claim that the Corps is wrong about the meaning of its joint rule with EPA that exempts some wetlands from regulation based on their "adjacency" to other wetlands.
展开▼
机译：上诉法官说，他们正在监督一项以数十年历史的EPA和陆军工程兵团规则为中心的诉讼，如果最终向最高法院提出上诉，则可以将某些湿地排除在《清洁水法》（CWA）之外，这是司法人员诉诸司法的工具。尝试限制法院对监管机构对湿地罗拉的解释的尊重。在8月16日，Universal Welding and Fabrication，Inc.诉美国陆军工程兵团诉美国第九巡回上诉法院法官的口头辩论中，对阿拉斯加金属加工公司Universal Welding and Fabrication的说法提出质疑，即该军团对与EPA的联合规则的含义，根据某些湿地与其他湿地的“邻接”，可以免除某些湿地的管制。
展开▼
